Q&A: Mike Vandermause fields readers' questions

Have questions or comments about the Packers? Send them to Green Bay Press-Gazette sports editor Mike Vandermause at mvanderm@greenbaypressgazette.com, and he'll provide responses.

♦ Q: I can think of no mathematical reason to go for two points against the Bears at the end of the game. There is one minute to go, a field goal will not help the Bears and a touchdown gives the Packers a 22-21 loss with an extra point. Explain please. The point spread was 4½, so if they don't make it, Packer fans lose a lot of money.

♦ Vandermause: Surely you aren't suggesting the Packers went for two points to cover the point spread, are you? The explanation is simple. The Aaron Rodgers to Greg Jennings touchdown pass put the Packers ahead 19-15, and tacking on two points forced the Bears to score a touchdown and extra point to win. Sure, extra points are successful about 99.9 percent of the time. But that is less than 100 percent, which is the point (pun intended). Had the Packers kicked a PAT for a 20-15 lead, the Bears would have automatically won with a touchdown. So the two-point conversion was the correct way to go.

♦ Q: Boy, I sure am glad that the Packers cut safety Anthony Smith. Not only did he outplay Atari Bigby, he was able to actually stay on the field. Bigby is one of those guys that the team keeps trying to throw at the top of the depth chart even though he can't stay healthy. Wow, what a bad move to cut Smith.

♦ Vandermause: Smith made his share of plays during training camp, but he also missed his share of assignments. And when the Packers had the chance to acquire safety Derrick Martin from Baltimore, they took it. This is not so much a discussion of Bigby vs. Smith as it is Martin vs. Smith. Martin is a better overall player, particularly factoring in special teams. I would agree Bigby can't stay healthy and that's a concern, but having Martin on the roster gives the Packers a safety net.

♦ Q: Please spread the word to Packers fans sitting in the front row of the end zone: If Ochocinco tries to jump in the stands, throw his (butt) on the ground and pour beer on him please.

♦ Vandermause: Would it be worth wasting a Miller Lite on him? Actually, I find Chad Johnson, er, Ochocinco, refreshing. In an era when players provide stock answers and drone on about how great the upcoming opponent is, it's nice to hear someone offer a little different take. It's all in good fun. I wouldn't blame fans for not taking kindly to Ochocinco attempting a Lambeau Leap on Sunday, but the best way to prevent that from happening is for the Packers to continue playing solid defense.

♦ Q: Is it a good thing for the Packers to be the youngest team in the NFL four years in a row, because you're not developing enough veteran leadership and smarts?

♦ Vandermause: Statistics can be deceiving. The Packers have a solid core of veteran players. All told, 19 of 22 starters that lined up against the Bears also were in the starting lineup a year ago to open the season, including all 11 defensive players. That's pretty good if you care about leadership and smarts and veteran savvy. So why are the Packers so young overall? General Manager Ted Thompson has built a base of older starters but keeps the team youthful by filling the bottom of the roster with rookies. A total of 22 of Thompson's 28 draft picks over the past three years are on the roster.

♦ Q: I don't think Ryan Grant is that great a player. He needs to stop running up the middle whenever he gets the ball. All these 2-yard gains here and there don't do anything for us.

♦ Vandermause: I tend to blame the line more than Grant for his lack of productivity against the Bears. Grant isn't a miracle worker, and there were numerous times when he had absolutely no room to run. He gained 61 yards on 16 carries (3.8 average) and earned most of those yards. He also had a 25-yard gain called back that would have added to his total.

♦ Q: Is offensive line coach James Campen's job on the line? It should be if they still can't get fundamentals down. All these guys have been in the league and under Campen for way too long.

♦ Vandermause: It's a concern when, after the OTAs, minicamp, training camp and preseason, your linemen don't have their fundamentals in order. Campen, as well as the players, have to accept responsibility for that. However, it was one game. Sometimes you run into a buzzsaw, and maybe the Bears' defense is better than advertised. Let's see how the line responds to a little adversity before we start throwing assistant coaches under the bus.

♦ Q: Me thinks the bright lights and the hype from the preseason success had an effect on that whole offensive unit.

♦ Vandermause: Maybe, but I doubt it. I didn't hear members of the offense going around anointing themselves as the next big thing after the preseason. They were pleased with their success, but I don't think it went to their heads. They ran into a formidable defense and for the most part got stuffed. However, when the game was on the line, the offense returned to its preseason form.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

Q&A: Mike Vandermause fields readers' questions

Have questions or comments about the Packers? Send them to Green Bay Press-Gazette sports editor Mike Vandermause at mvanderm@greenbaypressgazette.com, and he'll provide responses.♦ Q: I can

A link to this page will be included in your message.

Join Our Team!

If you are interested in working for an innovative media company, you can learn more by visiting: